The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes 08/03/1976A C E N D A PETALIULAA CITY' PLANNIN AUGUST 3, 1976 PECU MEIETT-NC' 7:30 P.M. "FALIZIA, CALTFM�" G COUNCIL CHA1,EBER-S, CJ.T HALL PE - The C01rTDiSs:[C)f1 encourages applicants (),.- the-ii: represeLitaLives to be 'V�i at t' rr.eetings to answer cluest7iOns, so that no agenda itc1flIZE; need be deferred to a 0 later date due to a lack of pertirienL information. - PLEDGE', ALLEGIANCE TO T.HE FLAC ROLL C . ALI, Bond -- Heald---- Ilarberson Horciza---- Popp - a L e r, 1,!X STAFF: Ronald F. Hall, Pl Director APPROVAL OF 1' C 0 P'll U S + 0 UPINCE p 1 _ 1 b j_ i L t e v , luaLe. the Environmen'tal Tillpa'ct: Question .I.o, EVALUAT101 mire Submitted by William McDc--vitt for a proposed v7. rehousa VA R' I-AN C E V7---,76 t be locatecl at Mr NOLL11 McDow. Blvd. S1-:J.'E DESIGN RFV1"E7'17: 2 pjtb, 'han the _i jt A req -1-1 to c -1 r , t o c. o ns d e r a %, � side southeast I iy!L f rom 20 feet to 5 fee:: an d th setback -line. froo, 25 feet to 10 feet to PrCvl(le ac Lcquate turnaround for off• -sn, parking afict for. the rIla neuLVE--'1.h 3. Si --j. f proposed warcho Sit desion..revie�-?. consideraL: :L or t be located at 1299 ! Blvd. J. W. - COMBS- Site design review considerations for proposed Mini- warehouse to SITE D . E . S1GWREVTn4: be located at 1100 Petroleum Avenue; continued from meeting of i•jay 11, 1976. ADJOURNMENT: �j =s MIN:UT'E S' • PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 3, 1976 REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY.HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA PRESENT: Comm. Bond, Head, Horciza, Waters,'Wright, Harberson* *Arrived at 7:40 p.m. ABSENT: Comm. Popp :STAFF: ''Ronald F. Hall, Planning Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the adjourned meeting of July 13, 1976, and the regular meeting"of'July 20', 1976; were - approved as submitted. CORRESPONDENCE: None WILLIAM McDEVITT Mr. Hall explained the request - by William McDevitt Company to E.I.Q. EVALUATION, allow a reduction in the required rear yard from 25 feet to 10 VARIANCE V7 -=76 AND feet, and a reduction =the required side yard from 20 feet to 5 SITE DESIGN REVIEW: feet for a warehouse with an office to be located approximately 37 feet from the Scott Street side property line, and 25 feet from the North McDowell Blvd. front property line. Mr. Hall further point'ed'out that the site has an- irregular shape with a depth of approximately'2b8.54 feet from North McDowell Blvd., a frontage of 120 'feet on North McDowell Blvd, with an approximate area of 31,186 square feet. The public hearing was opened to consider the Environmental Im- pact Questionnaire. No comments offered from the audience and the public hearing was closed. Comm. Waters moved to direct the Planning Director to prepare and post a Negative Declaration for the project. The motion was seconded by Comm. Head: AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 The public hearing relating to the Variance - request was opened. A discussion was held relative to - the. accessibility of trucks to the site via North McDowell Blvd. Comm. Bond stated that as subdivisions develop in the area, and if the proposed hospital is constructed; more traffic will- generate onto North McDowell Blvd., and the driveway entrance to the proposed site off North McDowell Blvd. would be a detriment to-traffic and should not be allowed. Comm. Bond further questioned Item 2 of the staff report as to • whether- the lot size could be - considered a hardship. Mr. McDevitt stated that a hardship does -exist due, to the relationship of the building to the lot. Comm. Bond stated that variances are to be granted only when there is an exception to the rule and not'be- Petaluma City Planning Commission Minutes, August.,3, 1976 a . cause of the inadequacy of .a lot- s to house a.certan type of structure. He added that the proposed structure does _not it this parcel of-land, 'Mr. McDevitt stated that - if - is'not ' granted a variance on the proposed 3/4 acre parcel'h e would then have . to :buy two ,lots and , in such , casee a hardship , condition does exist. Comm. Bond reiterated that, the size; o . a , lo,t could not be considered a hardship,. Comm.'Wrght - stated that variances are not granted to .solve problems and if granted ar.egr.anted with great hesitancy'. Comm. Head' agreed that a hardship condition does not exist in this , case but. stated. that., if these 20-f opt setbaek.:requirements are to be applied to industrial property users, industry' will be discouraged from coming_'to Petaluma: Comm.. Wright suggested- that. a new. ordinance should be` considered to allow for the.reduction �of the 20' -foot setback requirement in industrial areas,. Mr.•McDevtt stated that if the Planning Com- mission did not grant a variance the. proposed lots would. be unusable unless the required 20 -foo.t setback rule was reduced for industrial parks% Mr. Head stated that when the for the Industrial. P,ark'we're - originally laid out, the lots, were given -a blanket =foot setback, but later when the:subdivsi.on was filed 2'0 -foo.t setbacks were required:. Mr. Hall explained that the 'Commission was to.c'onsider only whether a.variance is ,juste of ied. Mr.Kevin Howard,.President of Flexible Plastics, 1250 North McDowell Blvd. stated he would like to see-this proper-ty• veloped and suggested that landscaping be provided on -the en- trance way to:the building,: Mr.- Howard added that the purpose of the industrial park. would be defeated if Blvd,. is not., considered �as .a possible. truck route. Mr. McDevitt ,stated that landscaping would be, p- rovided to screen the truck entrance. way -to ,the pr.o;perty. The-public., hearing was. closed., , Comm. H'arberson moved to. grant the variance bused on the findings indicated in-the-staff report. Comm. 'Head seconded the motion. AYES 5 'NOES 1 ABSENT- 1 .Comm: Bond qualified his; "No" vote'by stating that a hardship condition did not.exist.in this case. Comm. Wright moved.to approve the.site design for the proposed pro 'ject,.with- cond1tions:of approval as recommended by the staff and concurred with.by the Architectural and Site Design Review Committe'e•wit:h the provision that landscaping be provided on the paved driveway•eritrance . of•the site., and three white birch trees be placed in. northerly..corner of the property instead of the proposed three box trees_. -Themotion ,was seconded by Comm,. Head. AYES 5 `NOES '1 . ` 'AB !SENT• '.1 -2- t' Petaluma City Planning Commission Minutes, August 3, 1976 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Chairman Attest: 0 -3- J.W. COMBS Mr. Hall explained that an-Environmental Impact Questionnaire for SITE DESIGN. REVIEW: the J. W. Combs mini- warehouse to be located at 1100 Petroleum Avenue had been considered by the Commission on May 11, 1976, and a Negative Declaration had been pxepared, but the site design review considerations had been delayed in order to allow Mr. Combs to provide a grant of easement from the State, County and City for access to the subject property. Mr. Hall indicated that an easement for access will be granted by these government agen- cies if the proposed warehouse is approved by the City. Comm. Harberson questioned if this property was located in. the area of the proposed boat harbor. He stated -that the City pur- chased a certain perimeter of-land. surrounding the boat harbor to preclude businesses from the area and this action could effect the boat harbor and City of Petaluma as the price of property would tend to increase in the area. Mr. Halal explained that the City'property and the Combs property- would both be utilized for the boat harbor. Comm. Wright,moved to approve the site design for the proposed project with conditions of approval as recommended by the staff and concurred with by the Architectural and Site Design Review Committee:. The motion.was seconded by Comm. Head. AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 OTHER BUSINESS: Residential Development Applications (1977 -78 Construction. Year) Mr. Hall informed the Commission that 12 Residential Development applications for the 1977 -78 construction year had been received for consideration. Comm. Waters suggested that a time limit be set for each applicant. Comm. Harberson added that a 1.5/20 minute limit be established for each presentation, and that no more than four applications be considered at one meeting. The Commissioners concurred that Thursday evenings be set aside to consider the applications and .a 20- minute time limit be allowed for presentations.. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Chairman Attest: 0 -3-